Taken from here.

 
I love how Xavier  hides in the box, and then dad puts him in the box, and then baby goes back into the box. All of you moms out there with tiny ones can show this video to your partners and make them feel extra guilty that they aren't as adorable as  Emio is, what with the playing and filming and probably making his wife cry when she saw the short film. More »
Adorable Time-Lapse Video Shows Mom What Dad And Baby Do All Day is a post from Mommyish - Parenting Imperfect.

Taken from here.



The most popular article of the year in the Wall Street Journal was an excerpt of a book by Pamela Druckerman called "Bringing Up Bebe."
The excerpt describes the moment in which Druckerman realized that French kids are much better behaved than American kids and then set out to discover why that is the case.
Not surprisingly, American parents went nuts about the story.
Some, presumably, read it as a "how to" manual. Others, presumably, read it as criticism.
Either way, the story struck a nerve.

And what were Druckerman's conclusions?
Why are French parents better than American parents at raising well-behaved children?
Here are two key points:

• First, French parents aren't as obsessed with making sure their kids are in training to become CEOs, world-famous composers, professional athletes, and Senators from the moment they emerge from the womb. French parents do make sure their kids do some "activities," but they don't schedule every moment as training for some specific future achievement. Rather they give the kids some time to learn how to amuse themselves.
• Second, and more importantly, French parents teach their kids to wait. Specifically, they teach them to defer gratification--to wait until later to eat candy, to sleep through the night, to wait a few moments until their parents have stopped speaking before interrupting them, and so on. American, parents, meanwhile, want to encourage every blurt or impulse as an example of self-expression and are too wimpy to teach their kids how to be patient.

This latter point is critical. And, ironically, it may do more to help make kids successful than any of the "training" America's over-scheduled toddlers and kids get in all of their various disciplines.
For decades, psychologists have demonstrated that the ability to defer gratification is one of the best predictors of future success. In the 1960s, the famous "marshmallow test" at Stanford showed that kids who were able to not eat a marshmallow for 15 minutes in order to be rewarded with 2 marshmallows went on to be much more successful in life than the kids who just grabbed the marshmallow immediately. Since then, this experiment has been refined and repeated, but the bottom line has always been the same.

(A colleague of billionaire Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg attributes his success, in part, to this ability to defer gratification--and he jokes that, if Zuckerberg had been given the marshmallow test, he'd still be sitting in the laboratory not eating the marshmallows.)
But teaching their kids to wait, and calmly and confidently teaching them what they can and can't do--instead of worrying that they don't really have the right to do this--French parents produce kids that can, for example, sit at restaurants without destroying the table and driving their parents crazy.
And, more importantly, they produce kids who can amuse themselves, wait patiently until a parent has stopped speaking before asking for something, and sleep through the night.

(Yes, French parents apparently practice the controversial parenting tactic called "Ferberizing," in which babies are left to scream themselves to sleep rather than picked up the moment the start crying--and, thus, are taught to put themselves back to sleep. In America, in some households, this tactic is viewed as a form of child abuse. This wimpy American parent with impatient children, for one, certainly viewed it that way).
You can read Druckerman's story here >

SEE ALSO: Downton Abbey Fiasco Shows That Ancient Media Practices Are Absurd In Today's Global World

Please follow Business Insider on Twitter and Facebook.
Join the conversation about this story »

Taken from here.
 

Heads up, adulterers: lock your phone or throw it in a toilet or something because you're hella gonna get busted on Christmas Day. Happy holidays, dumbasses! More »

Taken from here.



I loathe to weigh in on the “war on men” conversation, but … alas.
While one can use both logic and data to poke gaping holes in Suzanne Venker’s argument that women need to surrender to their femininity and let men think that they’re in charge if they ever want to get married, I just want to point out one thing–one endlessly repeated thing–that she gets very, very wrong.
Venker claims that there has “been an explosion of brain research” that proves that men and women have different brains. This research, she claims, shows that men are loners who like to hunt and build things and women are nurturers who like to talk and take care of people.

This is false on two fronts.
First, she’s wrong about the brain research.  The books and articles claiming that there are “pink” and “blue” brains are not consistent with existing research.  (They are out there because people can make a lot of money by confirming other people’s biases.)
What does the research say?
It’s true that scientists have documented a number of small, average sex differences in brain anatomy, composition and function, as well as differences in size and tissue ratios. (Other differences, such as the size of the corpus callosum [PDF] and lateralization–whether one sex uses one side of their brain more than the other–have proven to be wrong [PDF].)
So scientists do find some differences, but they have largely failed to link these to differences in men’s and women’s observed emotions, cognition or behavior. That is, we’ve found some differences, but we have no proof that they translate into anything. Moreover, new research suggests that differences we observe may be designed not to create differences between men and women but to reduce them. The brain may have two strategies for achieving the same outcome, or one difference may compensate for another. (For more, see Brain Gender by Melissa Hines.)

That’s one reason why Venker is wrong.
The second reason is even more damning. Most of the research attempting to explain gender difference assumes that there differences to explain.  In fact, meta-analyses aimed at summarizing the literature on human sex differences and similarities in traits, personality, cognitive abilities, sexuality, temperament, and motor skills offer better evidence for similarity than difference. On the vast majoity of traits, men and women overlap tremendously.
Janet Hyde, a pioneer in this area, did a meta-analysis of meta-analyses that combined the results of 7,084 separate studies. She found evidence for a large or very large difference on eight percent of characteristics, and evidence for medium-sized differences on 15 percent.  She found evidence for small differences on another 48 percent.  What does a small difference look like?  Here’s an example of a mid-range small difference (for self-esteem):



For the final 30 percent of characteristics, she found no evidence of gender difference. So, on 78 percent of characteristics, she found teensy differences or none at all. Wow, “opposite sexes” indeed.
The truth is, men aren’t loners and women aren’t talkers. Venker assumes the stereotypes and counts on her readers to agree that they are true, but the data doesn’t back her up.
Two excellent books summarize the debates over gender and neuroscience. Cordelia Fine’s Delusions of Gender is great for a beginner; she’s funny and you’ll learn a lot. Rebecca Jordan-Young’s Brain Storm is great for someone who wants an intermediate-to-advanced introduction to these issues. Her book is downright brilliant. I highly recommend both.

Crossposted from Sociological Images
Brain embroideries from Flickr user Hey Paul Studios under license from Creative Commons 2.0

Taken from here.
 

Back in the '90s, Sesame Street writers and producers decided it was time to tackle the D word: divorce. But according to Tumblr Storyboard, when Sesame Street showed little kids the segment ahead of time, they freaked out: where would Snuffy (a.k.a. Mr. Snuffleupagus, the newfound victim of an imaginary broken home) live? Why didn't his parents love him anymore? Were Mommy and Daddy going to get a divorce, too? More »

Taken from here.

Even if we wanted to propose to a man, and no one is saying we do, imagining an earnest, sincere woman down on one knee offering up a shiny engagement ring to a surprised/ecstatic dude beaming with tear-brimming eyes seems kind of, I dunno, off. What would female-led marriage proposals look like in the hetero community? How would it translate into pop culture? OK, so maybe we shouldn't just reverse the gender roles, but we could innovate a little. More »

Taken from here.
 


Tory Burch recently denied that her company would have an initial public offering in the near future.
But investors told Women's Wear Daily that suitors are lining up to take her company public, and that the fashion community views her brand as the next Michael Kors.
The only thing holding Burch back from going public is her lawsuit with ex-husband Christopher Burch.

She says that his new line, C. Wonder, shamelessly copies hers, while he says that he advised her line to begin with.
"If Kors was sold as the next Coach, Tory Burch is seen in the investment community as the next Kors. And there are plenty of suitors lining up to buy a stake and bankers ready to take the company public," reports WWD.
Michael Kors had a blockbuster year. Many fashion insiders believe that the brand, which is especially revered for its handbags and watches, will overtake Coach.

Tory Burch's legal case is the only factor adding uncertainty to her brand, which is valued at $2 billion. The case is expected to go to court sometime in 2013.
DON'T MISS: The Fabolous Life Of Superstar Fashion Mogul Michael Kors >

Please follow Retail on Twitter and Facebook.
Join the conversation about this story »

Taken from here.
 


With the holiday season upon us, we're pressed to socialize with our coworkers and spend time with family all at once.
The folks on this list have found an easy solution to that time crunch—all year round. Their cofounders are their spouses.
It's a daring choice to launch a company with your true love. If things go wrong, your jobs and your marriage are both at stake.

On the other hand, marrying your cofounder has advantages, too. Running a company is an all-consuming thing. Why not share that with your beloved?
While it makes sense for the couples, risk-averse investors have sometimes looked askance at these arrangements. But Silicon Valley and Silicon Alley have rich histories of married cofounders including the founders of Cisco Systems, Len Bosack and Sandy Lerner; VMware, founded by Diane Greene and Mendel Rosenblum; Bebo, founded by Michael and Xochi Birch; and Buddy media, founded by Michael and Kass Lazerow.

Casey Sackett and Jennifer Wong, cofounders of Alt12 Apps

When Casey Sackett and Jennifer Wong were expecting their first child, Jennifer found no easy way to document the experience.
"I had a pregnancy journal to hand-write notes, a couple of reference books for health information, a few photos of my growing baby bump on my phone," she says. She wanted all this stuff on her phone as a few other things, like a contact her mom's support group for advice.
So in 2009, Casey Sackett and Jennifer Wong launched Alt 12 Apps with BabyBump, a mobile app for expecting mothers. They've since launched two more apps.
So far, so good for the couple. They raised $1.26 million in venture capital last spring and more than 1.2 million people have downloaded their app.

Susan Gregg Koger and Eric Koger, cofounders of Modcloth

High-school sweethearts Eric and Susan Gregg Koger launched Modcloth thanks to Susan's love of vintage clothing.
Susan couldn't resist buying cute vintage pieces, even if they didn't fit her. Eventually, she and Eric went off to college and her dorm room grew so full of stuff they decided to sell it online.
Today Modcloth employs 300 and has raised money from Accel and Norwest.

Erika Trautman and Cameron McCaddon, cofounders of FlixMaster

Erika Trautman and Cameron McCaddon fled the high cost of the Bay Area to launch their startup in the relatively affordable locale of Boulder, Colo., where they joined the 2011 class of TechStars, an incubator.
The company makes a product that allows for easy, Web-based video editing—a tool that typically has required expensive desktop software.
Since its launch a few months ago, FlixMaster has grown to about 6,000 users and has gained the attention of some big partners, like Sony.




See the rest of the story at Business Insider

Please follow SAI on Twitter and Facebook.

Taken from here.













The battle of the sexes is alive and well. According to Pew Research Center, the share of women ages eighteen to thirty-four that say having a successful marriage is one of the most important things in their lives rose nine percentage points since 1997 – from 28 percent to 37 percent. For men, the opposite occurred. The share voicing this opinion dropped, from 35 percent to 29 percent.

Believe it or not, modern women want to get married. Trouble is, men don’t.

The so-called dearth of good men (read: marriageable men) has been a hot subject in the media as of late. Much of the coverage has been in response to the fact that for the first time in history, women have become the majority of the U.S. workforce. They’re also getting most of the college degrees. The problem? This new phenomenon has changed the dance between men and women.

But what if the dearth of good men, and ongoing battle of the sexes, is – hold on to your seats – women’s fault?

-

As the author of three books on the American family and its intersection with pop culture, I’ve spent thirteen years examining social agendas as they pertain to sex, parenting, and gender roles. During this time, I’ve spoken with hundreds, if not thousands, of men and women. And in doing so, I’ve accidentally stumbled upon a subculture of men who’ve told me, in no uncertain terms, that they’re never getting married. When I ask them why, the answer is always the same.

Women aren’t women anymore.

To say gender relations have changed dramatically is an understatement. Ever since the sexual revolution, there has been a profound overhaul in the way men and women interact. Men haven’t changed much – they had no revolution that demanded it – but women have changed dramatically.

In a nutshell, women are angry. They’re also defensive, though often unknowingly. That’s because they’ve been raised to think of men as the enemy. Armed with this new attitude, women pushed men off their pedestal (women had their own pedestal, but feminists convinced them otherwise) and climbed up to take what they were taught to believe was rightfully theirs.

Now the men have nowhere to go.

It is precisely this dynamic – women good/men bad – that has destroyed the relationship between the sexes. Yet somehow, men are still to blame when love goes awry. Heck, men have been to blame since feminists first took to the streets in the 1970s.

But what if the dearth of good men, and ongoing battle of the sexes, is – hold on to your seats – women’s fault?

You’ll never hear that in the media. All the articles and books (and television programs, for that matter) put women front and center, while men and children sit in the back seat. But after decades of browbeating the American male, men are tired. Tired of being told there’s something fundamentally wrong with them. Tired of being told that if women aren’t happy, it’s men’s fault.

Contrary to what feminists like Hanna Rosin, author of The End of Men, say, the so-called rise of women has not threatened men. It has pissed them off. It has also undermined their ability to become self-sufficient in the hopes of someday supporting a family. Men want to love women, not compete with them. They want to provide for and protect their families – it’s in their DNA. But modern women won’t let them.

It’s all so unfortunate – for women, not men. Feminism serves men very well: they can have sex at hello and even live with their girlfriends with no responsibilities whatsoever.

It’s the women who lose. Not only are they saddled with the consequences of sex, by dismissing male nature they’re forever seeking a balanced life. The fact is, women need men’s linear career goals – they need men to pick up the slack at the office – in order to live the balanced life they seek.

So if men today are slackers, and if they’re retreating from marriage en masse, women should look in the mirror and ask themselves what role they’ve played to bring about this transformation.

Fortunately, there is good news: women have the power to turn everything around. All they have to do is surrender to their nature – their femininity – and let men surrender to theirs.

If they do, marriageable men will come out of the woodwork.

Suzanne Venker has written extensively about politics, parenting, and the influence of feminism on American society. Her latest book, "How to Choose a Husband (And Make Peace with Marriage)" will be published in February 2013. Visit howtochooseahusband.com for more information.

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2012/11/24/war-on-men/#ixzz2EGlbRyqm

Taken from here.



The jury’s still out on whether Lindsay Lohan‘s flick Liz And Dick will herald a comeback for the actress (for a Lifetime movie, I thought it was pretty fun!) but it seems that playing the often-married Elizabeth Taylor has given Lindsay a new, wise, spin on relationships. Rihanna, are you listening?
In an interview in the December 3rd issue of US Weekly, Lindsay opens up about her troubled relationship with DJ Samantha Ronson:

I was bold enough to say, ‘Yeah, I like a girl. And?’ That put her in a situation where she was being attacked every day. That’s not fair. And what am I left with? Heartbreak.

She continued:

I needed to love myself first before I could be with anyone. And I was going through a lot. Two toxic people cannot be together. End of story. We’re friends now. That’s how it started, so I think that’s what’s meant to be.

Pretty legit advice from the girl with too many arrests, rehab stays and legal battles to recount in one blog post. I remember the ongoing drama with Samantha Ronson and it sounds like Lindsay finally has some perspective on this important (if dysfunctional) relationship. Recognizing that you need to value yourself before you can be with someone else is one of the truisms of love; I hope Lindsay is finally on a path out of her years upon years of self-destructive behavior.

And the part about toxic people who shouldn’t be together? Rihanna (who is rumored to be back together with the man who abused her, Chris Brown) could most likely take a page out of La Lohan’s book. Listen, Rhi Rhi, sometimes love is not enough: toxic + toxic = a world-class catastrophe. I never though I’d be espousing Lindsay Lohan’s lifestyle as a positive example to anyone, but it’s evident she knows a bit about troubled relationships exploding in the press. If Rihanna and Chris Brown are back together, that’s a toxic ticking time bomb.

I’ve held out for years that Lindsay would eventually get herself together, and interviews like this one make me just maybe possibly please-in-the-name-of-Mean-Girls believe I was right all along.
Photo: Adriana M. Barraza/WENN.com
 
Related posts:

• Lindsay Lohan’s ‘SNL’ Promo: A Good Case Against Plastic Surgery
• Lindsay Lohan Tells Matt Lauer She’s ‘Clean And Sober’; We’re Still Worried About Her Mental Health
• Hey Hef: Lindsay Lohan’s Playbook Photos Aren’t ‘Classy.’ They’re Demeaning

Surprisingly Levelheaded Relationship Advice From Lindsay Lohan (Rihanna, Are You Listening?) is a post from Blisstree - Nutrition, Healthy Recipes and Fitness.

Taken from here.


Feminists and pro-choice politicians are calling for an urgent revamp of Irish abortion law after the death of Savita Halappanavar, a 31-year-old dentist who died in the Republic of Ireland after doctors refused to terminate her pregnancy. Halappanavar went to University Hospital Galway on October 21 and was found to be miscarrying, but doctors refused to induce an abortion as long as a fetal heartbeat was present.

Halappanavar’s husband, Praveen, claims his wife requested an abortion several times but was told, “This is a Catholic country.” She spent several days “in agony” before the fetal heartbeat stopped and doctors removed the dead fetus, and then died in the intensive care unit of the hospital from septicemia. Investigations into Halappanavar’s death will now be held by Ireland’s health executive and by the hospital itself.

Abortion law in the Republic of Ireland last came under international scrutiny when the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) ruled that the law violated the rights of a woman forced to travel to England to obtain an abortion. The court stated that the woman’s treatment violated her right to a private and family life–similar to the legal basis for Roe v. Wade. However, no changes have been implemented in Irish abortion law since the 2010 ruling, and it appears that legislators’ slowness to act has now claimed its first victim.

Even though the Irish Medical Council states that abortion may be performed if “there is real and substantial risk to the life (as distinct from the health) of the mother,” the reality is that decisions are left to the discretion of individual doctors. The ECHR found “a lack of effective procedure in the Irish Republic for [a woman] to determine her right to an abortion,” whereby women are not necessarily informed of their right to an abortion in life-threatening cases.

More worryingly, a conference of Irish medical professionals held just six weeks before Halappanavar’s death claimed that “direct abortion is not medically necessary to save the life of a woman.” Today’s news runs in direct contradiction to these doctors’ conclusion that “the prohibition of abortion does not affect, in any way, the availability of optimal care to pregnant women.”
While provoking heated debate about the need for Ireland to overhaul its 151-year-old abortion law, Halappanavar’s needless death may also serve as a warning of things to come if Ohio’s fetal heartbeat bill passes. As opponents point out, despite an exception to save the mother’s life, the bill would mean doctors have to wait until a woman is gravely ill before being certain that they can perform an abortion without prosecution.

And as we can see from this case in Ireland, there can be no waiting. There can be no obstruction to a woman’s right to abort a non-viable fetus. Because when there is, women can die.

Photo from 2012 pro-choice rally in Dublin by Flickr user informatique under license from Creative Commons 2.0

Taken from here.



Photo Credit: simondee

 
Would you give up your last morsel, that last delicious bite of food or very last drop of drink if someone asked it of you? So many people wouldn’t. But I would. And I have! Ask anyone that knows me, and they will tell you that without a moment’s hesitation I’d give up my last swig, saved just for down-the-hatch with that last delicious bite. And I’ll even give it to you with a smile. But that doesn’t mean I won’t yearn and mourn and drool for it. I do. I have. But I’d do it again and again!
Let’s face it, quite often we are taking our sweet time eating, chewing slow and cherishing every moment to the fullest, every delectable forkful, because God knows when you may eat or drink this again.

Though there are many people just like me, the Sharers, the Givers, I know of just as many that are just the opposite. They would never relinquish their last bite or last guzzle. Nah-ah! They don’t share. They are the Non-Sharers: the hoarders, the greedy…the selfish. I’ve even seen these non-sharers threaten their neighbor at the table with their fork; threaten to stab anyone that dares to even take a closer peeksie at their plate of food.

So take care, o’ ye that covet thy neighbor’s plate with that last bite of food or last swig of drink! The non-sharers look at that last bite or last gulp of drink as their Last Rights Meal or Holy Chalice.
Once, while hosting dinner in our home, my husband’s sister received a serious threat from her husband at the table. They were enjoying a first-time, ever, bowls of garlicky Cuban black beans with melt-in-your-mouth tender pork over Salvadorian fried rice. Let’s just say, if looks or a bark alone could kill, I would have witnessed a first-time murder at my home’s dinner table.

Continue reading >>

Taken from here.
 


I’m the youngest of three kids, fairly well-adjusted (my siblings might disagree), and have a great and close relationship to my mother. However, if there’s one thing I could change about my childhood, it’s that I wish I couldn’t remember my mother nursing me.

Don’t get me wrong. I’m a huge fan of breastfeeding and I’m very thankful my mother did that with each of us. I’m a nutritionist and I know all about the health benefits of nursing. But whereas my mother stopped nursing my brother and sister around 15 and 18 months — still a pretty long time and a really long time back in the 1980s when she was doing this — she kept nursing me until the age of three. Three years and three and a half months, as she confirmed for me last night.

I remember nursing and I remember the taste and everything. And it kind of weirds me out. I love my mother but I feel kind of sketched out about her breasts. Not in the logical sense. I appreciate that she nursed us and I know that there’s nothing too damaging about nursing children that long. But I just seem to feel more confusion about breasts, and my mother’s breasts in particular, than my siblings do. In fact, they seem to have literally no confusion about breasts. They do agree that it’s weird that mom nursed me so long. And I know that they wouldn’t do that with their children.

We’ve talked about it and even my mother concedes that she was nursing me that long mostly because she was sad about not being able to have more children. I was her third C-section so my dad got fixed after I was born. My mother is a great mother and she had always wanted more children. So she kind of clung on to me and babied me. I guess all parents do that with their youngest children to some extent. But they seem to get by without nursing three feet tall pre-schoolers, you know?

Nursing for that length of time helped my mother cope with the end of her childbearing years. But it didn’t help me have proper respect for my mother’s body. And I think it may have confused me about my own breasts. Now that I’m married — and hoping for children — I think I’m doing better. But when I started developing as a teenager, I couldn’t conceive (no pun intended) of breasts apart from their service to children’s health. And so whenever people wanted to talk about developing breasts or whenever boys noticed mine, I felt like I was being pressured into having children.

Again, I don’t want to make this out to be a bigger deal than it was. Obviously we all survived. But when I see covers like that Time magazine cover asking if you’re “mom enough” to nurse a 50-pound boy, I think sometimes the opposite might be more true. It might take more courage and strength as a mother to wean a child than it does to cling to nursing beyond a reasonable point.
(Photo: baki/Shutterstock)

Related posts:

• Mommyish Poll: What Do You Think Of TIME Magazine’s Controversial Cover?
• Dear TIME Magazine: I Am ‘Mom Enough,’ Thank You Very Much
• Kid From TIME Magazine’s Breastfeeding Cover Is Totally Screwed
• Mommy Wars: TIME Magazine’s Latest Breastfeeding Cover Sparks A Whole New Controversy

Post from: Mommyish

Taken from here.

 

At 26, four years after her mother’s death, Cheryl Strayed hiked over 1,000 miles on the Pacific Crest Trail—alone—to cope with her grief and a life that had spun out of control. Today, a New York Times bestselling author, her experience is laid out in Wild: From Lost to Found on the Pacific Crest Trail (read an excerpt here), a moving memoir that has us thinking a lot about our own mothers. Not to mention, what it would take to get through that kind of experience, with or without the grief of losing a mother. To find out more about how the experience impacted her life, we interviewed Cheryl about the book and how it still impacts her now as an author and mother:  

What did you expect that the Pacific Crest Trail would do to your relationship with your mother, and what actually happened? In those early years when I was first grieving my mom, I thought there would be a point where it would be okay that my mom was dead. Now that my mom’s been dead for 21 years, I’ve learned that it’s never okay that my mom is dead. You know Mother’s Day is coming up, and what I want for Mother’s Day is my mom. I hate Mother’s Day: Even though I’m a mother and it’s lovely for my kids to celebrate me, I always feel on that day like, I don’t get to call my mom up and say nice things or bring her flowers or whatever. I think on that Pacific Crest Trail hike, when I first went out there I thought, “Okay, I’ll reach that spiritual height that will make it okay that my mom’s dead.” But what I found is a very nuanced difference: I’ve reached that spiritual height where I’ve simply accepted that my mom is dead. There’s a difference between acceptance and something being okay. When someone’s wronged you, you can forgive them without saying that their actions were good or acceptable; you can let go of real harm and forgive without saying it’s okay. I think with my mom it was about acceptance, and when I went out there on the PCT I didn’t realize that. But what I learned on the trip, that was such a big message for me, was really just accepting the facts of my life, the good ones, the bad ones; the ones that contradicted each other, and that a lot of that really alleviated my suffering in many ways. It’s still sad to me that my mother’s dead; I still don’t like it. But I can live with it and thrive even though that sad thing is true.  

A lot of people participate in athletic events or commit to challenges like yours in honor of loved ones who’ve passed away. Why do you think so many people do this? You’re right, it’s in during times of suffering, and also milestones—think of all the people who say “I’m turning 30,” or “I’m turning 40, so I’m doing x”—and it often is a physical thing, like a triathlon or marathon or hiking some long trail. I really think there’s something primal about that experience of having to push yourself physically, and there are places we can only go when tested physically. What people are actually doing is forcing themselves to physically suffer. There’s nobody who’s run a marathon who didn’t at some point want to stop, or think “why the hell am I doing this?” or feel agony, and yet so many people do it. We physically hurt ourselves because in some ways it makes us feel good. It can be incredibly psychologically challenging, but also gratifying and fulfilling. I know that was true on the PCT. People always ask me: “Are your feet ok now?” And it was so painful and unpleasant, but it was also a piece of the trip that was important, in terms of going to that deeper place. Again, it leads back to acceptance. On the PCT I don’t think there was a day that went by that I didn’t tell myself to keep going and suffer through it, and that also reflects what we have to tell ourselves when something emotional makes us suffer. You know, you have a terrible breakup, and you think you can’t live without this person. But you can, and you do, and the way you do is you do it day by day—just like when you’re hiking or running, you get through it step by step. The physical thing teaches us how to survive emotionally. So much of Wild is about that–you know there’s that scene on the first day when I load my backpack up and I can’t lift it. And that’s what the book is about: I have to literally bear weight that I cannot bear. But I also have to emotionally, metaphorically, figuratively bear weight that I can’t bear. And so the whole thing is how do I do that on the outside and how do I do that on the inside.  

Since your PCT hike, are there practices in your daily life that you’ve carried through from that experiences? Yeah, absolutely. I haven’t gone on such a big journey since my PCT hike, but I’ve taken mini ones. And I would say that the thing that I carry with me from the hike always is, first of all, a kind of deep sense of confidence.I think that’s another reason people run marathons, because they can say they did it, and it might have taken them five and half or eight hours, but they did it. And I think that people are fed by having those kinds of accomplishments in their lives, even well beyond when those times are passed. It also gave me a real deep sense of my own resilience. For example–this seems so strange but it’s really true–I have two kids and I’ve given birth to both of them naturally, outside of a hospital without any interventions or drugs or anything. And my first child, it was a very long, hard labor; he was 11 pounds. And it was really, really really hard and really, really painful beyond anything I’ve experienced in my life. But I do remember at one point deep in labor, feeling at the end of my ability to go on, and I remember thinking of the PCT in that moment. Like I went deep inside myself to that experience on the PCT of having to hold on and keep going even when it didn’t feel possible. And it helped pull me through. So I do think that once you have that experience of resilience–you know, that you can do this, and recover from it, and keep going–it stays with you.  

Related posts:

• Wild Excerpt: The Beginnings Of A 1,100-Mile Hike
• Mother’s Day Musings: My Mom Has Nothing to Do With Blood or Biology
• ‘The Pressures Of Marriage, Motherhood, and Work Ignited My Alcoholism’
• That Girl: Meet Rachel Redlands, A Weight-Lifting Inspiration For All Moms
• Let’s All Listen To Jenna Fischer Say Very Sane Things About Post-Baby Weight Loss

Post from: Blisstree

Taken from here.



Good Morning DINKS.
Let me ask you a question, what do you love about being a DINK?
Is it the fact that you have extra free time to focus on your career and relationships since you don’t have kids?
Or is it the fact that you have the freedom to do things that families with kids may otherwise not be able to do?
I love being a DINK because I like having the support of my boyfriend.
I like knowing that I have someone to come home to, even though sometimes I just want to be alone. I like knowing that I can rely on someone else in case I am ever in an unmanageable situation, even though I am mostly independent.
I also like knowing that I have someone to talk with when I am making a big decision, even though my boyfriend very often remains neutral because he hates drama.

Why Do You Love Being in a Dual Income No Kids Relationship?

1. We Can Share the Expenses. Having two incomes in a relationship is definitely a financial benefit because all of our regular expenses are cut in half. If one spouse ever looses their job it can be a very scary situation, however there is comfort in knowing that our spouse can pay the expenses temporarily until we find another job.

2. We Can Both Contribute Towards Savings.  If we are saving up for a major purchase such as a vacation, new appliances, a new car, or even a new home we can achieve our savings goals in half of the time because we have two incomes contributing towards the savings.
We will still eventually achieve our savings goals if we were single, but it just might take double the time.

3. We Have Double the Income. Double the income means that we can spend more on our monthly living expenses.
With dual incomes we can live a more lavish lifestyle if we chose to do so. I am definitely not saying that we should spend all of our disposable income, but if we chose to splurge every now and then the financial impact does is not as devastating as it would be if we were single with only one income.

4. We Have Someone to Rely On. This is a major advantage to being a DINK.
I like knowing that I can rely on my boyfriend  (most of the time) and that there are no little children who are relying on me.
I would absolutely do anything for my boyfriend, I would go out of my way for him, and I don’t mind being inconvenienced (sometimes) for him.
However since he is a grown man it is very rare that he calls in favours. Unfortunately I cannot say the same for kids.
I would definitely take care of my boyfriend if he needed me to, but I don’t know that I can say that I would have the same commitment for helpless children who constantly need to be watched over and taken care of.
I guess that’s why my boyfriend Nick and I do not have children.

Don't Miss: 8 money moves that saved our marriage >

Please follow Your Money on Twitter and Facebook.
Join the conversation about this story »

See Also:

• Follow The 20% Rule When Saving For A Down Payment On A Home
• Amazon's Security System Is Making It Easy To Use Stolen Credit Cards
• Money Questions Every Couple Should Ask Before Starting A Family

Taken from here.

There are experiences that stick in our own memories for years. Sometimes we write them and share them with those on our blogs. Angie Kinghorn recently wrote a post that will likely stick in my mind for years to come. It's about birth and fear and death and mental health and even music. The raw emotion in this post combined with the fantastic writing create a post that I don't think you'll forget either.

Full article here

Photo Credit: dinoowww.

Taken from here.

Photo by Meagan

From across Europe to Mexico, Brazil, and Australia, here’s basic dating etiquette as far as who pays.

Germany

Germans are very subtle with their flirting. Unlike the rest of us, who might try to make an instant connection with the opposite sex, Germans tend to do things a little different. A guy walking up to a girl at a bar and saying “hi” would be much too forward.

Instead, German men have a highly sophisticated wooing device: the concentrated look — a gaze which might, but often doesn’t, include a smile. Most importantly, eye contact should be brief and fleeting. Guys will envision a long lost pet to enhance the forlorn and harrowing sense of melancholy.

If the woman is interested, she will walk up to him and drop her drink on the floor. The man will offer to buy her another drink, and they will talk about German politics and how wet their shoes are. Many will read this and dismiss it as melodramatic, but I think that would be missing the point. If this type of flirtation seems too subtle, might I remind you of the guy from last week who asked “hey baby, wanna get lucky?”

So, who pays?

If the man asks the woman out, it’s understood that he’s paying for the date.

France

Dating doesn’t really exist in France. Instead, they have dinner parties on Friday or Saturday night. These can be formal sit-down dinners starting with champagne, or a casual last-minute invitation. When the French go to a dinner party, it’s considered polite to bring a bottle of wine or flowers, but not food as that would embarrass the host. When two people at a dinner party become interested in each other, they might take a walk and discuss politics or the existential virtues of Camembert cheese. Later, they may arrange to meet for drinks at a bar, or stroll through a museum where they will say the word oeuvre over and over again until they are asked to leave. Men do not give women flowers at these meetings, as such a gesture would be considered razzle-dazzle, and might indicate that they are dating—which the French do not do.

So, who pays?

On the first date he will pay, and the next time she will pay. But they never split the bill. That would be tacky.

Turkey

Flirting is just as serious in Turkey as it is in Germany, but the method is more direct: If a girl doesn’t know he’s interested, he’s got no shot at her. In some Muslim countries, women aren’t allowed to be seen in public with a man who isn’t her husband, but Turkey isn’t like that. There is a common saying, “if you treat him like a king, he will treat you as a queen.” Dating is fairly straightforward here, and going out for ice cream (not dondurma) is becoming a very popular date idea, as ice cream flavor is an accurate compatibility indicator. Vanilla people tend to be colorful, impulsive risk takers. Strawberry people are shy, yet emotionally robust. People who like chocolate are compatible with butter pecans. On the subject of toppings, a Turkish girl will never take a man seriously if he asks for rainbow sprinkles.

So, who pays?

The guy pays, and there is no such thing as splitting the bill.

Mexico

Soap operas have wrecked the dating scene for guys in Mexico. Girls begin watching soap operas from an early age and expect dating to be as steamy as a summer love triangle. To provide the sort of passion they desire, boys must also watch soap operas, or at least have an alternate personality with his own private practice. Either way, he will have to wear a clean suit. On the date, he will gaze passionately into her eyes for ten straight minutes while reciting lines from Rubí. Doors will open for her. A coat will magically appear on her shoulders when she gets cold. She will groan beneath the weight of flowers and stuffed animals. Dates typically end with a kiss on the girl’s front porch and, as the boy is walking home, she will call his brother on the phone to seduce him.

So, who pays?

Guys pay. No one in the history of soap operas has ever split a bill.

Australia

Group dating is the norm across Australia among teenagers. Couples often don’t go out on first dates alone until their twenties. In Australia, it’s not uncommon for girls to ask guys out on dates. Nor would it be strange for the girl to make all the plans, including handling dinner reservations or finding a theater that’s not playing a Nicole Kidman movie. Guys sometimes do the asking, but most wait for the girls to take charge, as they secretly enjoy a girl who will open doors for them and give them flowers.

So, who pays?

Ladies have no problem picking up the check…at least for the first few dates.

Spain

It is becoming more and more common for both girls and boys to ask each other out. Sitting on the same side of the booth and touching while engaging in conversation is common in Spain, even on a first date. In America, this sort of thing would ring the abort signal, but here this is just something you do. First dates often include dinner or tapas, drinks and coffee, and the night very well might end at sunup.

So, who pays?

The man usually pays because he’s too macho to let the girl pay, even though he’s 30 and probably still has his mommy doing his laundry for him.

Traveller

(also known as Gypsy)

Traveller girls aren’t allowed to date until they’re married, but that doesn’t stop them from rockin’ the type of outfit you might see in a burlesque show. So, what’s a Traveller boy to do? Grabbing probably wouldn’t be your first instinct, but that’s what many Traveller boys do. ‘Grabbing’ is a courtship ritual where a boy grabs a girl, and this can get downright physical. Girls are strictly forbidden to approach boys, so the boys try to tempt the girl away from her friends. Perhaps tempt isn’t a strong enough word: Pushing, pulling, arm twisting are all fair play. The goal is to steal a kiss from the girl, which may lead to getting her number.

So, who pays?

The father of the bride typically pays for the wedding.

(Note: The first day is set aside for the church wedding. On this day there is a mock negotiation of bride-price, or sometimes a mock abduction: the groom’s friends and family storm the bride’s home, which is barricaded by the bride’s family.)

Japan

Group dating, or gōkon, is how a lot of Japanese people are meeting nowadays. Basically, a guy and a girl organize an event and invite three or four single friends (same guy/girl ratio). The venue is usually a restaurant where people can eat, drink, and get a bit loud. At its heart, gōkon is a social activity, but it is structured more like a town hall meeting. The guys arrive first, followed by the girls. Seating is organized boy-girl-boy-girl. The hosts make a toast, “Kanpai!” and then each guest gives a brief self-introduction. Drinks follow, and when everyone is loosened up, the hosts suggest party games that involve both chugging and divulging of embarrassing secrets.

So, who pays?

Girls typically pay a little and then the guys split the rest of the bill. Then it’s off to the bar or karaoke joint. A successful gōkon will earn you a phone number.

Brazil

In Brazil there is a highly sophisticated classification of romantic relationships. Ficar is first, and might include anything between a make-out session and a one night stand. The key distinction here is that happened one time. Ficante is the term used when either the girl or guy decides to meet back up with a ficar. Here, they’re edging toward booty call territory. Next is paquera, which is a frequent ficante that has boyfriend or girlfriend potential. This is where the girl decides if he’s worth laying groundwork for the future. Namorado is your classic boyfriend/girlfriend status. Kids tend to live with their parents until they get married, so at this stage the boy can finally expect to meet the girl’s family when he comes to pick her up and take her out to dinner and a movie, or whatever.

So, who pays?

Guys pay for all of the date, as well as the pay-by-the-hour motel where they became ficars and ficantes and paqueras.

Taken from here.

Working mothers are getting some serious press this February. As we’ve covered, the New York Times has been debating maternity leave rights for working women. NPR is looking in to the wage gap between working mothers and their childless peers. And now Forbes contributor Victoria Pynchon has jumped into the conversation with a series of pieces on the unconscious bias (and downright anger) that employers and bosses hold against moms. Obviously, American business media is ready to have a conversation about what it means to be a working mother and how corporations need to support those who choose to have a family and continue to be a productive member of the workforce.

Ya know what I say? Bring it on! Let’s discuss these important issues.

Let’s talk about the fact that women who utilize the benefits, such as a flexible schedule and telecommuting, that their companies offer to new moms are often penalized over time for making those choices. Ladies who tough out their “work life balance” without these niceties have a better chance of keeping up with their childless peers. Or ya know, men. Because while there’s definitely a gap between moms and childfree women, being a dad actually increases the likelihood that you’ll get that next raise.

Let’s analyze the fact that it’s not just moms who are looking for better work life balance within their careers. An entire generation is hoping to change the conversation from “Who put in the most hours” to “Who made the best use of the hours they worked.”

And let’s all sit down and decide, as business owners, co-workers, parents and non-parents, just how responsible companies should be to those who make the choice to have a family. Because right now, in this country, the court systems have made it clear that it’s not an employer’s job to take care of new parents. In Texas, you can be fired for pumping breastmilk at work. In the case against Bloomberg this summer, a judge ruled that companies do not need to accommodate for “work family trade-offs” that employees choose to make. Right now, we’re saying that if women choose to have children, we’re okay with paying them less money and affording them less opportunity.

	Staples Co-Founder Blames Bad Economy On Breastfeeding Moms
	Should Employers Have To Accommodate Pregnant Workers?
	Study Shows That Women Use Public Transportation More Than Men Because Of Their Jobs
	What Motherhood Taught Me About Running A Business Meeting

Maybe that’s the way the majority of us feel. After all, parenthood is a choice. It’s one that fewer and fewer of us are making every year. Do we need children to further the species? Sure. But I have a feeling that we aren’t going to run out of adorable little babies any time soon. Do people have a moral obligation to become parents? Of course not. I say this as a woman who enjoys being a mother and is kind of desperate to start the whole process again. That doesn’t mean that everyone else feels the same way. That doesn’t mean that everyone needs to be a parent.

We all have different priorities. I understand that those who choose to have kids might need to prioritize their little ones above their commitment to their company. We should probably accept that this happens sometimes.

The problem is that every working mother is judged to behave in the same manner the minute after she gives birth. Some ladies made have supportive husbands who will be staying home with the sick kids. Some women will be judged just in case they might want kids in the future, even if they aren’t mothers now. Instead of dealing with individual cases, companies and managers made general assumptions based on a very wide and diverse group of people. This behavior is going to happen, so we need to decide how we’re going to step in and protect all mothers from falling under the same stereotypes, or if working mothers deserve that protection.

I don’t have all the answers to the questions. I’m not sure exactly what a company owes its working mothers, whether it be paid maternity leave or a more flexible work schedule. I do know that these issues deserve serious conversation and analysis. That’s why I’m so excited to see working motherhood get some high-profile debate. Maybe now, we’ll be able to give women who are considering motherhood a more realistic picture of the challenges that they’re going to face. Then every woman can decide for herself where her priorities are and what she’s willing to sacrifice. Because as a million and one people have said now, “You can’t have it all at once.”

Related posts:

• Working Mothers Are Losing Sleep Over Career Anxiety


• More Young Women Are Perplexed By Working Mothers Trying To Have It All


• Working Mothers Need More Realistic Expectations


• The Newest Wage Gap Pits Working Moms Against Working Women


• New Study Says Working Moms Are Redefining What A “Good Mother” Is


• India’s Companies Make Working Moms A Priority

Post from: TheGrindstone

Taken from here.

We know you’re 100% professional while on the job. But some jobs put you into more contact with other single dateable people than others. The job-search website CareerCast recently came up with a list of jobs where you’re likeliest to met a potential mate. Essentially, these are jobs to meet men because your potential of encountering a wide selection of eligible mates is high. Here are their picks, along with a few of our own, that will help your dating life.

Slideshow here

Related posts:

• If My Co-workers Found Out I Was Online Dating, I Would Quit My Job


• Office Etiquette: Dating Your Co-worker


• What To Wear On A First Date

Post from: TheGrindstone

Taken from here.

Katherine Heigl, adoption advocate and mother of one, brought a different topic to your screens today as she described the plight of working mothers: whether to stay home, do part-time, or just hit the gas and go full throttle.

Women with babies on the way or in the home may chastise themselves for having jobs or passions that take them from their home as the guilt that overcomes a mother not solely preoccupied with comparing diaper brands can leave many feeling selfish in motherhood. But Katherine told the ladies over at The View that her interests outside the goings on of her three-year-old Naleigh actually make her a better mother.

The actress took to those teal couches running the obligatory gamete about mommy guilt and her abilities to adjust her work schedule once she adopted her daughter from South Korea. But giving up her career completely, she told the audience with her daughter at her side, was never something that she considered — primarily because pursuing her career positively impacts her ability to raise her daughter:

“I just ultimately wanted to be a mother. I love children. I still want more children and I feel like I am the best mother I can be because I have this passion, because I have this job I love so much. I am a better mother for having something in my life and not just my children.”

Katherine also shared a bit about her decision to adopt, citing her own upbringing as the biggest influence as she also has an adopted sister from South Korea with whom she is very close. She told the ladies that she very much wanted to create a family that “resembled” her own, and that included adoption.

The actress and mother has not only been candid about her own family and childhood experiences with adoption, but has also spoken in favor of the practice encouraging others to adopt. But when not speaking up about the gift of adoption, it appears Katherine is also speaking up for mothers who thrive from their work.

(photo: dailymail.co.uk)

Post from: Mommyish